I just posted this thread at Sal's forum. He maintains you are only "uninvited" from threads by their authors. You are cordially invited to this one. Just a little experiment. Anyone want to bet on the outcome?

I just posted this thread at Sal's forum. He maintains you are only "uninvited" from threads by their authors. You are cordially invited to this one. Just a little experiment. Anyone want to bet on the outcome?

He's a lying little shitstain as always.

I just navigated to the site and once again got this, the identical message that has popped up ever since he silently banned me. I can't even view the site let alone post there.

Feel free to post it there and call the shitstain's bluff.

--------------"CO2 can't re-emit any trapped heat unless all the molecules point the right way" "Global warming can't be real because it still gets cooler at night" "All the evidence supports Creation baraminology"

I just posted this thread at Sal's forum. He maintains you are only "uninvited" from threads by their authors. You are cordially invited to this one. Just a little experiment. Anyone want to bet on the outcome?

He's a lying little shitstain as always.

I just navigated to the site and once again got this, the identical message that has popped up ever since he silently banned me. I can't even view the site let alone post there.

Sal himself has posted on Alan's thread. A bloke by name of Rich posted "Typical Sal:" plus a link to the Young Cosmos thread here, and Sal replied to it by quoting Rich's entire comment, followed by "April Fools!"

Tell us, Sal: What was the April Fool gag? Occam's site-ban, or CEU's yes-we-like-free-speech posturing?

Is Salvador his real name? I suspect he may be suffering a Jesuscomplex. His entire "career" is geared to proving conclusively that his version of YEC is true and in accord with "The Word of God" and the entire Bible. Which of course implies that science is wrong on all counts and should be rejected.

Or something like that. His inability to see the beam in his own eye is obvious to all but himself.

A new registration process is being put in place to reduce forum spam. In the meantime, if you want to register, just let one of the current members know through your personal channels that you want to participate.

They must send me a private message with your desired username and an email address where I can send your temporary password, and I'll set up an account with temporary password. You can then change your password after you login.

Just dropped in on Slimy Sal's Drive-Thru Creationist "University". The most recent comment on its forum, in the "Any topic under the sun" board, is dated 5 August. Its title is "Why won't you respond to my monologue Sal?", and its author's nym is "Mung the Psycho Stalker". Reading it and looking at its two links, it sure looks like Slimy Sal has been up to his usual unilateral-editing-to-make-critics-look-bad tricks.

The second most recent comment is one of Slimy Sal's own, in the "Creation science" board, and it's dated 26 July.

Yessiree-Bob, that there Creation/Evolution University surely is one happenin' jointâ€¦

Just dropped in on Slimy Sal's Drive-Thru Creationist "University". The most recent comment on its forum, in the "Any topic under the sun" board, is dated 5 August. Its title is "Why won't you respond to my monologue Sal?", and its author's nym is "Mung the Psycho Stalker". Reading it and looking at its two links, it sure looks like Slimy Sal has been up to his usual unilateral-editing-to-make-critics-look-bad tricks.

The second most recent comment is one of Slimy Sal's own, in the "Creation science" board, and it's dated 26 July.

Yessiree-Bob, that there Creation/Evolution University surely is one happenin' jointâ€¦

University of 'wooden spoon' would be a grander title. Sal as usual over reaches.What faculties would he have?Obfuscators delighted?Dembski's detractors debunked?Me and my friend a lesson in binary stereo reductionism.Why you must accept orders of magnitude on the age of teh Earth is dependent on Wednesday rather than on fact.

I then realized dead things don't come to life by themselves, so life needed a miracle to start. And if there was a miracle there was a Miracle Maker. If the origin of life was by a miracle, then it became possible to consider the origin of species (actually major taxonomic divisions) was a result of a miracle. Michael Denton's book Evolution a Theory in Crisis (it's a pain to read) pretty much destroyed most reason to believe in evolution.

The more I studied biology and science, and the more I studied real scientific disciplines like physics, I realized evolutionary biology is a sham science. Privately, many chemists and physicists (whom I consider real scientists) look at evolutionary biologists with disdain. Evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne himself admitted: In Science's pecking order, evolutionary biology lurks somewhere near the bottom, far closer to [the pseudo science of] phrenology than to physics.

Then I look at the behavior of defenders of evolution. Many of them hate Christians and act unethically and ruin people's lives like Ota Benga and personal friends like professor of biology Caroline Crocker and persecute Christian students. They tried to deliberately create deformed babies in order to just prove evolution. They tried to get me expelled from graduate school when I was studying physics, merely because I was a Christian creationists. It was none of their business, but they felt they had the right to ruin my life merely because I believed in Jesus as Lord and Creator.

I then realized many evolutionists (not the Christian evolutionists) are Satanically inspired because of their psycho evil hatred. So I realized even more, they are not of God, and therefore not on the side of truth. They promote "The Lie" because the father of Darwinism is the Father of Lies. Darwin himself referred to certain Christian doctrines as "damndable".

Sal goes on to link articles from ICR about evolutionists desiring to "create deformed babies to prove evolution" and something about the "human/mice chimeras he's cited in his junk DNA research" with a touch of the obligitory Sanford ...

Â Â

Quote

In fact a pioneer genetic engineer, John Sanford, rejects evolutionary theory. So being able to genetically engineer something shows intelligent design is possible, it doesn't prove evolution.

And with a final flourish ...

Â Â

Quote

What good has evolutionary theory brought to the human condition? So if Darwinism is true, it appears to be worthless and damaging, and if it is false, it is worthless and damaging and false.

I've not known one single person who became a better person because he came to believe he was the product of random processes and was descended from a monkey. NOT ONE!

However, I do know of people who cleaned up their lives and became better husbands and fathers and human beings when they realized through real science they were created in the image of God to be moral creatures.